I don’t think humanity is going to continue to agree to what is government approved torturing of people who have already undergone trauma. I don’t think humanity wants to be inhumane. So eventually those people who have altered states of consciousness and unusual sensory experiences won’t be subjected to a forced psychiatric regime, by the fearful public, who if they were better would never approve of such things as ECT and forced drugging.

Thursday, November 15, 2012

In 2013 we must end the psychiatric regime

When an inhumane law needs to be changed you have to
write the truth, rather than softening your life story into fiction. ‘Oversharing’
is necessary when people have literally been shut up and tortured for so long,
all the while the public prejudice has continued to be so deeply ingrained by
media propaganda.

Most Australian publishing
houses still consider a first-hand experience of what psychiatrists term ‘mental
illness’ to be a point of view that is unsellable. These publishers prefer the ‘authority’
of a medical practitioner over those with lived experience. And, they really
don’t want to hear the truth, they want something that might get a little help
from pharmaceutical sponsorship. It’s a horrible feed-back loop that is never
ending in its destruction of people’s lives.

I’m sure the public doesn’t
want to be inhumane, by allowing the continual torture of people who are in
crisis, but they are because they do allow it. Some even condone it as
necessary and back their arguments up with pseudo-science. They don’t even
think about the many blogs that scream out how painful forced psychiatric
treatments are to the person undergoing them. In the minds of people supporting
psychiatry, they forget about the person who is made an involuntary patient and
reduce them to something without sentience.

Think next time you nod your
head and go along with what a psychiatrist is going to do to your unwilling
relative, friend, or acquaintance, think about what actually makes sense.
Listen if the person you are close to says, ‘I don’t want this.’ Understand why
their reasons may be complicated into a parallel world of their psyche, which
they may be expressing, more than the language of consensual reality. Don’t
agree to the jargon of the psychiatrist more than the symbolic reasoning of the
person you know. If you think about it, you should know who you’re with.

Most psychiatrists don’t help
or heal, they police, by restraining and maiming. That’s what they’re taught to
do. (Not that they’ll want deal with someone who is violent, no, that’s a
police matter.) It’s only very odd psychiatrists that don’t order their staff
to enforce retraining and maiming, drugging and disabling. Those psychiatrists
who don’t, are not very well accepted by the psychiatric community.

The Mental Health Act, a part
of Victorian law, backs up psychiatrists in my area. And all over the earth,
there are similar government laws to allow psychiatrists to torture people who
are having difficulties coping with traumatic events in their life. Why?
Because the way these people are coping is outside the range of understood
sense. But if, given time, and conversation, instead of drugs and other
tortures, there are means through which seeming nonsense becomes obvious, as a
symbolic parallel sense to the language of consensual reality.

Society understands that you
have to learn gain a new understanding in order to read writers such as Shakespeare, or learn subject
matter such as physics. Even music and other art forms can be ‘acquired tastes’
and need to be understood through realisation and effort. People who have had a
revolution inside themselves, need to be afforded the same respect.

So, why is it so difficult to
understand that a person needs to be thought of as an individual that cannot
fit the template of some other person? Yes, I know, friends think they ‘know’
their friends and when a friend goes into a ‘psychotic episode’ then the other
friend freaks out because suddenly they don’t understand. They then accuse that
there’s ‘something wrong’. Yes, miscommunication and suppression of traumatic
events is what’s wrong.

So, what would be right?
Allowing what’s been suppressed to be communicated in whatever medium it takes,
that is non-violent. Make sense? I’d like to see health professionals do just
that when a person is in crisis, rather than judge, accuse, drug and belittle.
And the only way that is going to be the intervention for a crisis situation
where a person has lost touch with consensual reality, is for the laws that
say, ‘drug them’ and ‘ECT if they’re having a baby or not responsive to drugs’
to be changed.

‘What? She thinks she can
change the law?’ I hear people say incredulously.

No, I don’t think I can change
the law. I think the law must change, now, not sometime in the dim distant
future.

‘What? But people who are
mentally ill must be treated or they’ll be the death of us!’ I hear another in
the crowd shout.

People must be treated with
respect, given help and understanding as well as compassion, when they’ve
drifted into a parallel sense. When people haven’t committed crimes, why on
earth are they being accused like they have? Does the population think that all
people diagnosed by psychiatrists are antisocial and dangerously so? They’re
not, if you look at the stats on these things.

There’s more crowds of people that
go on and pooh-pooh me, saying forced drugging is the ‘only viable means of
combating these psychiatric diseases.’

Diseases? Yeah, psychiatrists are
the disease. They attack the stressed, grieving and traumatised and make it
almost impossible for these people to recover. They are an ugly blight on our
society that needs to be cured. In 2013 we must end the psychiatric regime!

I think the best way of
combating the disease of psychiatry is by recognising their treatment regime has
no place in government law. I think, then, psychiatry won’t be such an
aggressive disease and people can work out for themselves what is and isn’t
healthy treatment.